mrcndc
Member
Kudos for being forthright about responsibility. Too much blame shifting these days. A mark of good character, also, seemingly in short supply. Thank you for your post.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Accident while on EAP...
- Thread starter Freewilly
- Start date
To clarify, I don't hover over the brake, I just try to keep my foot relatively close to the brake in case I need to brake rapidly.
chronopc
Active Member
At that speed I don't think the curved path would have confused AP. I've used AP in similar situations many times and I've never seen it get confused in that scenario.
Thank you for the kind words!
I'll echo that it certainly is refreshing. Best of luck in getting this fixed.
I actually see acceleration near the end. That should have been the point that the chimes start announcing end of EoP. Definitely looks like foot on accelerator to me. After all, it had happily been following for awhile. Not enough curvature to lose the sonar, vision, or road position.
ElectricLee
Member
Yes, please let us know what Tesla finds out.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
I thought this at first, but then looked at the fence to the side.
Super_Popular
Well-Known Member
Is it odd?, AP2 has always sucked. Mine slowed from 55 to 45 on the freeway yesterday for no reason, I almost got rear ended.
Interesting observation, it does seem to slow initially as the car in front slows down, then speeds up when they do, but the car doesn't slow down again.
Yes, I still find it odd. AP should have easily handled this situation.
I get the phantom braking events too. The "no reason" is 1 of many factors that are errors in the AP programming.
- The map data is incorrect and wrongly guesses the roads actual speed (This can be solved if Tesla would actually read speed signs)
- The car uses the incorrect speed from another close by roadway rather than the road your actually on
- The car incorrectly locks on to a vehicle in another lane thinking they are drifting into your lane
- The car gets an incorrect radar bounce-back from a sign or bridge
- The car momentarily uses the speed from that bridge
Really annoying (and dangerous). I don't understand why AP relies so much on the radar. I mean... there are 8 cameras on the car. AP should use the cameras (Tesla Vision) and radar together. But it really seems like that isn't the case.
I hope with the FSD computer and giant leaps in Tesla's Neural Net vision programming, that this will get resolved quickly. Because these phantom braking incidents are dangerous (even if your hands are on the wheel and feet right by the pedals). Your car is practically brake checking people....
Agreed, phantom braking is way different in this case, assuming AP was still engaged.
Super_Popular
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
That was a large vehicle that he hit not some small Smart car.
If AP was there is no excuse.
That would certainly explain why it seemed to slow down initially when the car in front slowed down, then didn't the subsequent time, after speeding back up.
OP, back to you, do you typically keep your hands on the wheel when on AP? Admittedly, I don't always, until it nags me. (Sorry so many questions, the former accident investigator in me is curious on this one).
Garlan Garner
Banned
Agreed, but somewhat goes to timing. If using NoA, then you would think AP should still be on as it wouldn't have enough time to nag, then shut-off if the OP didn't respond to the nag. If just on AP, nag could have happened and the OP missed the nags, which caused it to shut off just before impact.
After reviewing the video a few times, it does look like AP was still active.
Vehicle 1 (the OP's vehicle), was still perfectly centred in his lane around a bend in the road. If AP disengaged then vehicle 1 would have ceased to follow the curve in the road and would have proceeded straight into the guardrail rather than into vehicle 2.
Additionally, since vehicle 1's driver (the OP), claims to have dosed off, AP would have begun beeping like crazy before disengaging, thus arousing the OP from his slumber. AP doesn't just disengage without warning.
From the evidence I can see at this time, this looks like a failure of the AP system. The only thing that could change this determination would be additional data showing that the driver of vehicle 1 hit the accelerator before impact. But I don't believe this to be the case as there is no video evidence showing that vehicle 1 lurched forward from an unexpected accelerator hit.
Sorry.. previous Police and private investigator here. These are observations from my professional opinion. I could be wrong with additional information presented.. but I think my determination is correct.
Vehicle 1 (the OP's vehicle), was still perfectly centred in his lane around a bend in the road. If AP disengaged then vehicle 1 would have ceased to follow the curve in the road and would have proceeded straight into the guardrail rather than into vehicle 2.
Additionally, since vehicle 1's driver (the OP), claims to have dosed off, AP would have begun beeping like crazy before disengaging, thus arousing the OP from his slumber. AP doesn't just disengage without warning.
From the evidence I can see at this time, this looks like a failure of the AP system. The only thing that could change this determination would be additional data showing that the driver of vehicle 1 hit the accelerator before impact. But I don't believe this to be the case as there is no video evidence showing that vehicle 1 lurched forward from an unexpected accelerator hit.
Sorry.. previous Police and private investigator here. These are observations from my professional opinion. I could be wrong with additional information presented.. but I think my determination is correct.
Similar threads
